Water Management, Indigenous Rights and the State

19th Century Shift
- Transition from direct resource extraction to resource management.
- European settlers aimed to create "homestead" farms in Canada, with water becoming vital for mining, agriculture, and industrial developments.
- Codification of land and water rights became integral to colonial processes. (Matsui, pg. 6)

Multi-faceted Development
- Water rights in Canada and the US shaped by diverse groups: lawyers, judges, native elders, anthropologists, and historians.
- It was a non-linear process; not all narratives reflected the same perspectives.
- Critique of old Native history narratives:
- Often portrayed victims, emphasizing colonizers' power.
- Lacked representation of Native agency and roles.
- Recent scholarship since the 1970s emphasizes interdependency and interconnected histories over narratives of separation. (Matsui, pg. 7)

Ideals versus Local Realities
- Remote colonial authorities adhered to idealistic beliefs about resource management.
- Local authorities executed more pragmatic decisions regarding resource issues.
Framing of Indigenous Land Use
- Indigenous land use termed "inefficient" and "uncivilized" through an industrial lens.
- Vast areas of land considered "empty" and ripe for colonization.
Complications Arising
- Disputes existed over Federal/Provincial relations, indigenous/non-indigenous water usage, and mixed dynamics of cooperation and conflict.
- Matsui recommends a case study approach for deeper understanding of these issues.

Historical Water Use
- Water traditionally used for transportation and irrigation.
- 19th century technologies enabled hydroelectric power production.
Development of Hydro Resources
- Cities like Calgary required power; hydroelectric initiatives involved rivers on Indigenous reserves.
- Stoney Nakoda traditional territories spanned about 70,000 acres, primarily suited for animal grazing and hunting due to weather limitations.
- Undefined hydroelectric water rights allowed Stoney Nakoda a platform to assert their interests.

New Technologies
- Late 19th century witnessed important advancements: hydraulic turbines, DC and AC power, electric generators, transmission lines.
- Emergence of major hydroelectric plants (e.g., first plant at Niagara Falls) attracted investor attention.
Location Strategies
- In the US, hydroelectric sites were positioned near urban centers; in Canada, situated distanced from cities, encouraging government incentives for companies to develop nearby.
Regulatory Confusion
- Initial applications for water use for power production lacked clarity; confusion persisted regarding whether irrigation precedents were applicable to hydroelectric ventures.

Initial Surveys and Negotiations
- Indigenous groups were not permitted involvement in early surveys determining hydroelectric use at Horseshoe Falls.
- Historical dissatisfaction from Stoney Nakoda due to poor compensation for land surrender to the Canadian Pacific Railway.
- Initial agreements involved lump sum payments: $110,000 for the river and $7,150 for surrounding lands, equated to future increases in demands due to hydroelectric power interests.

Variability of Representation
- Agreements signed by varying representatives highlighted potential for lack of universal assent within Stoney Nakoda interests.
- Payments from companies consistently delayed; rather than discontinuing deals, governments extended payment deadlines.

Initiatives by Calgary Power
- The Calgary Power Company sought to establish a power station at Kananaskis Falls without prior notification or permissions from Stoney Nakoda.
- In response to delayed payments, Stoney Nakoda demanded land parcels and monetary considerations (a supply of geldings, lump sums, per capita payments).
- The critical inclusion of water rental was proposed, tying rights to the realization of riparian rights (rights associated with landowners over flowing water).
- Extensive negotiations led to improved agreements based on their conditions; attempts to bypass Stoney Nakoda through provincial appeals were not pursued.

Subsequent Developments
- Calgary Power's dealings with the Department of Indian Affairs (DIA) led to delayed payments despite understanding of the tribe's rights to water and land.
Ghost River Development
- The Dominion Waterpower Act (1919) allowed federal government extensive control over waterpower resources, reflecting growth aspirations of industrialization.
- Stoney Nakoda's proposed agreements typically included flat fees and subsequent land acquisition rights.
Administrative Transfer Agreements
- 1930 Natural Resources Transfer Agreements transferred control of lands to provincial authorities while maintaining federal jurisdiction over Native Affairs, complicating existing agreements.
- Resulting delays meant years of arbitration and consultations for Stoney Nakoda, underscoring the legal entanglement and agency challenges they faced.

Agency Recognition
- Matsui posits the Stoney Nakoda fared relatively well under challenging circumstances; despite late payments and under-compensation, they secured a negotiating role.
- Emphatic adoption of riparian rights language established historical precedents for Indigenous ownership of water rights.
- Following developments showed uninterrupted acknowledgment of tribal water rights by Calgary Power and DIA.
Government Compliance with Indigenous Claims
- Access needs motivated governmental recognition of Indigenous land and water rights amid the absence of codified legislation.
- Emphasis on clean and sustainable hydroelectric development projects ingrained the interactive nature of Indigenous interactions with colonial powers during this period, counteracting perceptions of passive acceptance.